Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Last comment.

I am moving all my articles to my new website, www.naturamedica.webs.com, therefore there will be no new posts on this blog, but it will remain in existence for a while.
Thanks for reading it and please log on the new site, let me know what you think.

Saturday, September 19, 2009

The Fibonacci Potencies Series: update, comments and conclusions

One year after the creation of the Fibonacci Potencies, I report the results of its continual use in my clinic.
More details and cases, with in-depth discussions will be in the book due to be published hopefully in December 2009. In the meantime, enjoy this paper. Please note that the illustrations are not coming through and the same full text with illustrations can be downloaded for free from www.lulu.com

The Fibonacci Potencies Series: update, discussion and conclusions.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

Opening salvo.
The Fibonacci Potencies series, or F series, was introduced and published last year as a method to simplify the prescription of correctly chosen homeopathic remedies. The title of the paper was clear: “Removing the guesswork from potency selection”.
This technique has evolved since then to become the main, if not the almost only way I prescribe in my homeopathic practice. It has also given me some insights into some frequently asked questions and allowed me to find integrated answers to most of them. Those answers are certainly bound not to please everybody and I am quite prepared to witness some ferocious arguments swamping the homeopathic community. So be it. It is only through challenges and by getting out of our comfort zone that we can progress.
There will be lots of repetition of notions, cases and explanations, because they appear in different sections that have been divided artificially for more clarity (hopefully that worked out well…); read through the whole paper, then read it again and then again, as the information, as it suits to homeopathy, is not linear but is a complex pattern.

Previously on this screen.
The whole idea of the F series was to have guidelines regarding the best potencies. Every practitioner has his own way; every teacher, lecturer or alleged authority has another approach and the conclusion of a book researching exactly that (What about the potency?) was “It works for me”. Not very helpful! Did that mean that any potency, any way of administration would work as long as the remedy is correct? Some practitioners argue that this is true, but too often a remedy was given in one potency, then another, nothing worked but yet a different third one, given in despair, cured the case. I looked for a system that would simplify the whole affair and would at the same time be based on a natural rule pervading everything. That is when I stumbled across the Fibonacci mathematical series which is found everywhere in the living world and in the artificial world, from music, architecture to the stock exchange. For more details refer to the paper “Removing the guesswork from potency selection”.
The Fibonacci series is 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233 and so on. For our purpose we use it from 3 to 233, potentising the remedies as 3C, 5C, 8C, 13C, 21C, 34C, 55C, 89C, 144C, and 233C. Potentisation is done manually with 10 succussions at each stage. The manual technique, although having caused some tennis elbows, allows knowing exactly what potency we are using without the shadow of a doubt. The ten succussions were chosen because that was the routine in use at the Simillimum Pharmacy in Wellington, where the potencies are made.

The potencies.
For each remedy prescribed, we follow the order, starting with the lowest up to the highest we want to reach. 55C and 89C are the most frequently used highest level covering most of the cases; 144C and 233C are used only occasionally. Their respective indications will be explained soon.
Starting potencies are 3C, 5C or 8C.
This so-called “low potency” is the starter potency used for non-toxic plants and non-toxic materials. Its actual concentration or rather dilution is one part per million (1PPM), still detectable with regular laboratory techniques. Without taking into account the factor of dynamisation, 1PPM still has physiological effects and therefore is not used with toxic substances, poisons, venoms, etc,…despite the fact that the French homeopaths and some English ones like Compton-Burnett have used 3C potencies of many toxic materials without any problem. 3C is also used to prepare isotherapic or tautopathic remedies from conventional drugs for the purpose of helping removing them and their energetic imprint from the body. It makes sense it will not be harmful as these drugs are swallowed or injected in large material doses.
Referring once again to the seminal paper, it is to be remembered that those potencies are not a simple succession of weird ones, but that they have a multiplying, exponential effect, allowing one to reach extraordinary high potency levels otherwise unobtainable.
3 = 3 3C
5x3 = 15 15C
8x15 = 120 120C
13x120 = 1560 1.5M
21x1560 = 32760 33M
34x32760 = 1113840 1MM
55x1113840 = 61216299 62MM
89x612166299 = 5448241800 5MMM
144x5448241800 = 773546819200 774MMM
233x773546819200 = 180236413271600 180MMMM

In other words, those are calculated potencies that can be achieved by giving hand succussed remedies without the need for hypotheses and bizarre techniques that assume levels of potencies without any proof. See the previous paper for graphs.

This level of dilution is equivalent to ten parts per billion (10 PPB). There is really very little statistical chance of encountering any atom or molecule of the original substance, and if this would happen I can quite confidently affirm that nothing harmful will ever occur. We use 5C as the starter potency for toxic plants, poisons, metals and minerals in general; some of those are not available at a lower dilution anyway.

5 = 5 5C
8x5 = 40 40C
13x40 = 520 520C
21x520 = 10920 11M
34x10920 = 371280 370M
55x371280 = 20420400 20MM
89x20420400 = 1817415600 2MMM
144x1817415600 = 261707846400 262MMM
233x261707846400 = 60977928211200 61MMMM
I was pushed into using that starting potency for the nosodes as the lowest potency that was in stock to prepare the remedies was 6C. I reluctantly complied at first but experience has shown there was no problem starting with an 8C

8 = 8 8C
13x8 = 104 104C
21x104 = 2184 2M
34x2184 = 74256 74M
55x74256 = 4084080 4MM
89x4084080 = 363483120 363MM
144x363483120 = 52341569280 52MMM
233x52341569280 = 12195585642240 12MMMM

Realise that 12MMMM means a potency of 12 trillion C!

At first, patients were informed that this was an experimental protocol and were offered a choice between the F series or LM/Q or regular C potencies according to my previous, usual way of prescription. Having become a lot more confident after the first 25 cases and the results presented in the previous paper, the F series became my “routine” prescription for all but very rare patients who wanted to keep going on with LM/Q potencies.
I am mentioning only patients who received an F series, of course. Success rate is not considered as this depends upon the correct choice of the remedy, and this is not an audit of my practice. What is reviewed here is what happens with the correct and the incorrect remedies.
At the time of writing, there were 126 different patients.

The following chart shows the number of patients and the number of remedies they took.

Number of patients Number of different remedies received
1 11
1 10
1 9
3 7
4 6
4 5
5 4
5 3
13 2
89 1

Some of those patients received a mix of different remedies, as a complex, but in an F series and not 11, 10 or 9 different remedies one after the other. A fuller explanation about this system will be forthcoming.
About 30% of all those patients are still in active treatment.
Contact and follow-up was maintained by email during the treatment, but some patients did not bother to either be in touch during the treatment or to report what has happened at any time. I can only assume that if they had a complication or a side effect, they would have called in anger and that those who did not maintain contact are at worst unchanged. I did meet some of them by chance on social occasions or at the shopping mall; those who did not manage to run away and escape my inquisition reported that they were doing well.

The remedies and their frequency of use.
Here is the list of the remedies I used in an F series since the beginning of this work; the number indicates how many times it was prescribed, no number means only once. This list is correct at the time of writing.
Aconite 2
Agnus Castus
Arnica 5
Argentum Nitricum
Arsenicum Album 4
Arsenicum Sulphuratum Flavum
Asterias Rubens
Aurum Arsenicosum 2
Aurum Muriaticum Natronatum 5
Baryta Carbonica
Bellis Perennis
Cadmium Arsenicosum
Cadmium Fluoratum
Cadmium Metallicum
Calcarea Arsenicosa 2
Calcarea Carbonica
Calcarea Fluorica 4
Calcarea Muriatica 3
Calcarea Phosphorica 12
Calcarea Silicata 4
Calcarea Sulphurica 2
Carcinosin 10
Causticum 7
Chimaphilla 2
China 2
Chlorpromazine 2
Clematis Erecta
Conium 2
Cuprum Arsenicosum 2
Equisetum 3
Fluoric Acid
Gingko Biloba
Hepatitis A vaccine (starting 34C)
Hepatitis B vaccine (starting 34C)
Hypericum 3
Ignatia 5
Kali Carb
Lac Caninum
Lac Defloratum
Lac Humanum 2
Lachesis 5
Lespedeza 2
Luesinum (aka Syphillinum)
Lycopodium 4
Lycopus Virginicus
Magnesia Muriatica 2
Meningococcus vaccine (starting 34C)
Mercurius Solubilis 2
Natrum Phosphoricum
Natrum Muriaticum 13
Natrum Silicata
Natrum Sulfuricum
Nux Vomica 3
Phosphoric Acid 2
Phosphorus 6
Plumbum 3
Plumbum Iodatum
Pulsatilla 10
Radium Bromatum
Ranunculus Bulbosus
Rhus Tox 5
Ruta 3
Sabal Serrulata
Salicylic Acid 2
Salix Fragilis
Sepia 9
Silica 10
Solidago 2
Staphysagria 5
Stramonium 3
Sulphur 7
Tarentula Hispanica 3
Thuja 5
Tuberculinum 3
Typhoid vaccine (starting 34C)
Urtica Semen 2
Uva Ursi
X Ray
Zincum Phosphoricum

A total of 107 different remedies; as mentioned in the previous paragraph, some of them were given in a mix according to the rules of Complexism. The remedies are selected through usual repertorisation and consultation of materia medica; isotherapic or tautopathic remedies made out of vaccines and conventional drugs are included, with the proviso that some have received a regular, orthodox proving. I have used some unusual herbal remedies (Lespedeza for example) in an F series to try and get more intense organic stimulation. I cannot yet comment on that technique as I do not have enough cases to compare with the usual tincture prescriptions.

Safety of the method.
This is of course a major issue. In the previous paper I was asking those questions at the start of this work: “I had some anxieties: would there be horrible aggravations? Would there be intense provings? Would there be permanent grafting? What would happen if the remedy is not correct?”

I thought one patient, W.E., did prove Lachesis, but in fact it was “only” an extreme aggravation caused by an impatient mother giving one powder every day, from 5C to 89C, to an incontrollable and extremely agitated child. That aggravation was corrected with one dose of Arsenicum Album 200 (as per repertorisation of the extreme symptoms) given in water, 3 repetitions. Then the next indicated remedy appeared clearly. None of the 126 patients has shown any sign of proving until the date of writing.

Grafting is the superimposition of the remedy’s symptoms, as seen in the provings, upon the patient’s ones. It can happen when a remedy is “imposed” on the patient’s physiology either by multiple repeated doses or by too high potencies. It is a situation that is especially difficult, if not almost impossible, to get out of. Repeated doses and high potencies (even though they are calculated ones) are characteristic of the F series; yet none of the 126 patients has been grafted with an artificial disease, to my knowledge. It might have to do with the fact that once a series is done, it is very unusual to repeat it unless it is needed (see later “intricated layers”); when the remedy is needed, treatment happens and not grafting. The obstinate repetition of useless series of remedies would be a concern in any type of prescription methodology.

They do happen. W.E., the Lachesis child, is one example, albeit an extreme one and the worst over the 2 years I have been using the F series.
M.J. is a patient with a long and complicated history and a traumatic past whom I have been treating for 7 years now. Her main problems are type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dizziness and progressive kidney failure. Her latest remedy was Plumbum Metallicum 5C to 89C. The first doses were taken as one powder dissolved in a teaspoon of water. They resulted in a deep feeling of amelioration and emotional comfort but with an extreme aggravation of the dizziness. Nux Vomica 30C in drop doses controlled the aggravation and we switched the Plumbum to liquid doses, one dilution glass, one drop from the glass and repeat when the amelioration fades away; when the repetition becomes ineffective, it is time to move to the next potency. This allowed constant and steady progress with small aggravations controlled by Nux Vomica as needed. Her blood sugar stabilised and her kidney function deterioration has dramatically slowed down as demonstrated by normal HbA1c levels and a normal glomerular filtration rate even though there is still microalbuminuria with slowly increasing urea and creatinine levels.
Another patient, RMC, received Calcarea Phosphorica but due to her extreme sensitivity, we needed to use between 5 and 13 dilution glasses for each powder, working backwards and going to the next potency when there was no more reaction to the first dilution glass. She had the same problem with LM/Q potencies; the advantage of using the F series was a slightly faster evolution. But her case demonstrated that even extremely sensitive patients can use the F series, contrarily to what I implied in the previous paper, when I was probably overcautious.
Here is what F.W., a patient with rheumatoid arthritis for years and very high ANA levels wrote:
“As I had an immediate and intense response to the first dose of Causticum (5) I felt it necessary to e-mail you for advice as to how and when to continue the regime you prescribed.
I took the Causticum as directed at 2pm Thursday X July 200X. Within 1/2 hour I developed nausea and dull ache in temples and back of the head.

At 1am Friday I woke with a vicious searing pain travelling from the left chest cavity to the sternum. It felt like a molten, golf-ball burning its way across my chest. Over the ensuing hours the pain gradually subsided. This episode was very similar to my experience before being hospitalized in March 1992 with a suspected heart attack. I underwent all manner of tests - revealing no heart malfunction. Drs at the time dismissed it as being rheumatoid related "as the ribs are in fact jointed to the sternum"... Even though the pain was on entirely different level to all other joint pain I was experiencing.

I have felt totally exhausted over the week-end with a number of other earlier symptoms returning - burning eyes, chest rash, dry niggling cough. I have woken in the early hours absolutely bathed in sweat, to the degree of needing to change my PJ's. The headache remained constant and I've had little appetite. All the nodules on my hands and feet have become intensely tender to touch. All Joints, muscles etc are less painful than is often usual...though this may be attributed to the bed-rest I've compelled to undertake.

I also feel emotionally drained... constantly on the edge of tears.

It is now Monday morning and I am gradually improving. Eyes feel better, chest rash not so fiery, cough not so insistent, night sweat not so pronounced. Headache barely there. My chest feels heavy - like there is a brick in there. However, it only hurts when I breath deeply. Nausea has gone. Appetite has not really returned as yet.

Overall (believe it or not) Thank You - Causticum just may well be the beginning of ridding this monster!!! I just never expected to be completely bowled over. I feel positive and confident about continuing the regime and was wondering if it will be OK to take a day in the sun and leave the next dose until tomorrow? And of course I wonder if I need to be prepared for a similar reaction?”
Very intense reaction, definitely in the category of aggravation, but as is clearly mentioned, the overall feeling is that things are moving, changing and the deeper emotional status is that we are on the right track. The methodology of administration was changed and will be discussed later.

Other aggravations were minimal, some cleansing diarrhoeas, especially with Sulphur, nothing very different from what is seen with C and LM/Q potencies.

False aggravations: unmasking other problems.
Using the F series with the correct remedies has brought an unexpected bonus.
In one patient, H.C., whom I treated for 6 years, I was able to finish the treatment within a few months once I switched to the F series, concluding with Ignatia previously given in C and LM/Q potencies. She then complained of a sore throat, which I attempted to treat over the phone, after all it is a routine condition: no such luck! After a few unsuccessful prescriptions, I asked her to come in: nothing wrong with the throat, the pain was an irradiation from muscular spasms in the neck. I relieved the spasms with Ortho-Bionomy, then examined her neck properly and discovered her second cervical vertebra was misaligned in right rotation. I sent her to an Osteopath as I do not adjust spines. She also complained of “feeling inner vibrations all the time”; a quick energetic check showed her Crown charka totally open and absorbing energy in a massive manner. Closure of the charka stopped the vibrations. She has been completely well with no recurrence of any symptom whatsoever since then (follow-up of 6 months at the time of writing).
Another patient, P.S., during the course of his treatment, received Natrum Muriaticum, then later on Sulphur both in F series. He took lots of doses of Natrum Muriaticum by his own advice and seemed to have a proving characterised by intense chest pains, like angina pectoris or even myocardial infarction, although when checked in hospital everything was normal. After some other remedies, we moved to Sulphur, which caused the same symptoms. I was completely baffled, until the patient sent me the results of his hair mineral analysis, showing an extremely low level of Calcium, Magnesium and Potassium, even though the blood levels were normal. I interpreted this as the effect of the remedies trying to normalise the tissular levels of the minerals and in doing so, creating plasmatic imbalances and symptoms in the cardiovascular system, probably by suddenly shifting electrolytes from the blood to the tissues. Vegetables juicing, bone soup and mineral supplements took care of the problem.
Therefore it appears we need to be very vigilant: the extremely deep action of the F series, or of a “threshold” potency can unravel problems that must be treated differently; a structural, mechanical problem is not well treated by homeopathy (exceptions do exist), a nutritional deficiency needs proper input of nutrients, not energy medicine.
The F series with the correct remedy will treat completely what is treatable with dynamised, potentised substances, triggering the physiology of the patient in the proper direction and towards the appropriate action. It will also unmask other problems, as demonstrated, show them clearly and allow the choice of other therapies as needed. We must be aware of that and able to recognise this phenomenon.

Wrong remedies.
Amazingly, nothing happened, even when a remedy was purposefully given for a local problem or as a symptomatic or palliative treatment.
Palliation happened fast with the added bonus of revealing the deeper problem. In cases of palliation or suppression, we would expect, or so we have been taught, that the same problem would either reappear as it was or be modified and cause deeper pathology in other locations or systems. That was not the case. It was as if the F series completely stripped the complaint for which it was prescribed, exposing the original problem (or a place closer to the original). At times, the same “palliative” remedy reappeared as if it was again another layer; eventually it became the final curative remedy: H.C. is a lady with many allergic problems and a bad history of abuse. Ignatia was needed early in her case, and some repeated doses allowed us to make steady progress with different remedies, each one bringing ameliorations at all levels and exposing other symptoms; eventually an F series of Ignatia was needed (the first Ignatia was a series of C potencies, 30, 200, 1M, 10M) and this completed the cure.
The repetition of this phenomenon in a few cases allowed me to formulate the existence of “intricated cases/layers” where layers of pathology interpenetrate and are not the nice, regular concentric onion peels some theories describe. Those interwoven layers at times are totally eliminated from the case with one single series of the appropriate remedy and at times are so anchored by other pathologies that they must be freed through the use of other remedies before allowing the final Simillimum to act fully.

Concentric layers, the “onion peel” image, with the main, core remedy at the centre.

“Intricated layers” with the potential for any layer to lock another one in its place and allow only a partial removal by a remedy, hence the need to repeat the remedy after the lock is removed.

The “almost correct” remedy.
A “wrong” remedy might also be a Simile, an “almostcorrecticum” but not a “goodenoughicum”.
J.H. received Natrum Muriaticum in an F series; her main complaint was a foul body odour that almost nothing could mask. With Natrum Muriaticum, the body odour disappeared as I reported last year.
Then she got an upper respiratory infection, went to her GP, received antibiotics and the body odour came back! She begged to receive another course of Natrum Muriaticum but it was clear that if antibiotics could reverse a previously successful treatment, then that treatment has been suppressive and not curative; repeating Natrum Muriaticum would be a mistake. So the search continued and after a few useless remedies, all in F series without problems but with only small changes, she was able to give more information on the emotional aspect of her situation (so the previous remedies were not that useless!) and finally received Silica 5C to 144C with apparently good results…only time will tell.
This and a few other similar cases confirmed my earlier suspicion that once an F series has been gone through (lifted to 144C or 233C if deemed necessary) the whole possible effect of the remedy has been used and there is no use to repeat it or switch to an LM/Q for example. If that remedy has not cured or not done the intended action, if only a partial action, symptomatic, was expected, then the selection of the remedy was wrong. How does that fit with the “intricated layers” I just described? In my experience, when that problem arises, there will be new, different symptoms, often not covered by the actual remedy, pointing towards another remedy altogether. When this happens, we interrupt the series, give the other remedy, and then come back to the original remedy where it was interrupted when the new, different symptoms have been dealt with.
Therefore, another bonus of that F system is that it becomes very clear whether the remedy is correct or not. No doubts about potencies as we go through all of them; a recurrence of a pathology, which was apparently cured, by a minimal “antidote” is not at all “antidoting the remedy”, it is simply revealing that the remedy was not correct in the first place (even though pretty close) and that the practitioner has to go back to the drawing board.
Quite a lesson in humility!

Timing of the remedies.
The correct timing is once again nothing new: the first dose of the lowest potency is taken, either in dry, wet or liquid dose, wait, see what happens, repeat if using a liquid dosage when changes have stabilised, move to the next potency when there is no more evolution.
In the previous paper, I described patients taking their remedies too closely, one powder every day, and others forgetting to take their remedies, ending up with a totally incoherent schedule; this continued to happen, with no problems. With too long intervals, the amelioration was stationery until the next dose came in to continue the work; with too hasty administration, the positive results were positive although at times lingering symptoms took some time to disappear: each symptom being covered by a different potency, a different “wavelength”, if it is interfered with, that symptom will not disappear at the appropriate occasion but will have to be dealt with by a now healthy physiology once the full treatment is finished. This confirms the orthodox warning that too early a repetition might “negate” the effect of the previous dose, in that system at least.
Some patients wanted more precise time guidelines, some appeared to need them. At first I thought I would be smart and have a double Fibonacci whammy with timing between doses of 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13 and 21 days, but that meant the treatment would be too long and protracted; so the timing went to the prime series of 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11 and 13 days….but almost nobody ever managed to follow it as I always mention it is only indicative, that it is better to wait more as long as there is evolution and that they have to ask me in doubt. Only one patient, V.S. did follow the prime timing chronology faithfully to the hour, religiously, with an excellent end result.
Even the most rigid OCD Arsenicum Album patient, after a few doses, did release his pathological rigidity, was able to discard the set timeframe and use repetition as requested by his own reactions.
A fellow homeopath who tried the F series on some of her patients, Meridy Brown, experimented with at first a dry dose, followed by the same potency in water; she found out that in her cases, the dry dose was creating major changes and an awareness of those changes; then the further liquid doses were useful to fine tune the reaction and complete the work of that given level of potency; she gave up to 8 repetitions at certain potencies until the last one did not do anything at all before moving to the next potency: talk about squeezing the lemon to the end! I do suspect she had some training with the income tax people! Here are her comments in her own words: “I experimented with a first dry dose at the beginning of each new potency, followed by the same potency in water doses. I found that in those cases, this first dry dose produced a noticeable change to the patient fairly soon after having been taken. The changes felt by the patient were then able to be communicated to the practitioner more clearly, allowing the practitioner the ability to judge the appropriateness and action of the chosen remedy. This new, clearer awareness by the patient, revealing to them that with little doubt, it was the remedy producing the changes they were feeling, (which they themselves had prepared and administered), solidifies in the patient the realization that they are able and may in fact desire to participate in their own healing process. For patients coming from orthodox treatment where they have no or little participation in their own illness, this is a new thought that takes some getting used to! A sense of hope, exhilaration, better understanding, responsibility, and then an excitement to participate in their own healing process has been established! We are now in a "Win-Win" environment for both patient and practitioner. This is a valuable additional benefit realized by using the method of a first and only dose being a dry dose, when beginning a new potency”.
This seems a very interesting technique for difficult, long standing cases, or for the intricated cases; it needs and deserves to be explored more in depth.
All this shows that, although timing is important for optimal results, and that repetitions are better done only when the action of the previous dose has stopped, the system is quite supple and forgiving. There is no need to have a harsh, dictatorial timing prescription, but sloppiness either in prescription or explanation is never welcome.
Availability to the patient for guidance is of paramount importance, the technology of email has been an invaluable tool.

Speed of action.
I can confirm what I wrote one year ago, that the speed of action is remarkably high as compared to that of C and LM/Q potencies.
There is no protracted wait to see the possible action a few weeks or months later, as Kent described.
Either there is a reaction and you follow it, or there is none and you know, once the series is finished, that it was the wrong remedy, no harm done, not too much time wasted.

Why finish the series if there is no reaction to the first few doses?
It has become very clear that the appropriate or adequate potency at which the patient will first react is totally unpredictable. The conventional rules of adapting the potency to the patient’s vitality or to the energy of the disease are at best indicative. This accounts for many email discussions where one potency of the seemingly indicated remedy was given, no reaction, then another potency without results, then yet another one and finally in despair the last one available that settled everything; you can write any potency anywhere in this example, and shuffle the potencies in any order.
Using the F series, it became obvious that each patient and each stage of disease will be covered by a different level of potency, hence partial cures and recurrences when the proper potency is not attained.
And once more, there is nothing new! Parimal Banerji (Advanced homeopathy and its materia medica) works this way: any remedy will work at some potency for some pathology but not at an other potency; each remedy has specific indications at specific levels of potentisation.
By going through ALL possible potencies with an F series, every single level of reaction will be covered, unless it is anchored by another pathology that needs another remedy; when that other remedy has acted, the anchored level is freed and can now react to a repeat prescription of the previous remedy. This is why some patients needed the same remedy prescribed at different phases of their treatment.

Going through an F series is like exploring all the stations on a radio, moving the cursor from one frequency to the other, but not jumping form one to another. In doing so, you will be able to listen to each and every station that is broadcasting without missing a single one. When there are interferences, you will miss a few stations, but then you remove the interferences (with another remedy) and can again “clean the airwaves” with the first remedy.
When the remedy is the Simillimum at that time, the amelioration seems to “hover”, remains stable and waits patiently for the next dose that will bring the patient to the next level. Therefore we can indulge in waiting a bit longer, be “sloppy” on our timing.
When the remedy is partial, either because we did not find the Simillimum or because we are dealing with an obstacle to cure or a partial level, after the initial amelioration, some symptoms will reappear or new symptoms will appear. The next dose of the partial remedy will refine the situation until not needed any more and clarify the next remedy prescription.
An example is G.M.F who came with symptoms of fibromyalgia, depression, headaches, PMS, etc,… The prescription was Carcinosin 8C to 89C. Three weeks later, she comes in to report, having taken only the first 3 doses. She says (reproduced here with her permission): after the 8C, slept better straight away, a few short anxious moments in waves, then they are gone; the head is clear, not foggy, the colour is back in the face, there is no more fibromyalgia; 13C taken after feeling the effects were tapering: the sleep is even better, more energy, head even clearer, calm; able to stand off against mother (issues of smothering and overbearing) and it was easy, never before have been able to do that; tapering again, went to 21C and immediately better again; the fibromyalgia symptoms started to come back when the tapering occurred but were immediately removed with the 21C; the PMS is gone, no breast pain, no back pain, no irritability. There is a past history of rape at the age of 12, the emotions were still vivid and active during the consultation; did not even think about it since the first powder and when I asked her to go back to that place, there was nothing, only numbness, does not feel anything about it any more; dreamt about her father, said sorry to him, talked to him and got a big cuddle; even her husband was telling her “take the next powder” when he saw her coming down again. And all this in less than 3 weeks with potencies nobody ever uses, especially with a nosode. The tapering phenomenon is present despite the extremely deep action of Carcinosin; therefore, I warned her that we will probably have to give her another remedy at some point in the future.
It has been suggested that the different potencies of the F series were similar to quantum leaps, that we were jumping form one potency with curative properties to another with other properties.
That would negate the multiplication effect (5C x 8C = 40C, 40C x 13C = 520C, etc,…). A publication I read a few years ago (but I could not find the article although I believe it was in Homeopathic Links) did indeed show that potencies work in clusters; the examples I seem to remember were 6C to 30C, then 200C to 10M and higher, meaning that 30C and 10M would have the same frequency, the same field of action, but a different intensity. That would indeed explain the high rate of success of the French homeopaths who until recently did not have access to potencies higher than 30C but managed to treat mental, emotional and psychiatric cases very well, albeit with multiple repetitions.
This is one way to look at those potencies:
The French concentric potencies

The Kentian concentric potencies

Of course, those can also be seen this way:


which are spirals, like the Fibonacci series, with the difference that the Fibonacci spiral is mathematically and geometrically perfect, the others being approximate spirals.
And to go from one potency to another on a spiral, you must go through all the intermediate ones; you cannot jump from one to the other as is the case in concentric circles.
The multiplying effect is creating the amount of energy needed to fill the space-time continuum between two threshold potencies that are further apart as they increase, with more volume (time and space) between two higher potencies, hence the need for more time between two doses as the potencies increase.
This, in my understanding, removes the possibility of quantum leaps of potencies. The F series follows a simple geometrical, exponential progression.

I know, it reads like pseudo-scientific blah-blah with the use of big words and no substance, so let’s try to use simple language: one single potency, at whatever level, will have a limited action (it can be enough to produce a cure though, as 200 years of practice have demonstrated, by removing the major pathology and allowing the normalised physiology to take over and cure the rest; but you need to hit the right potency). By giving one potency after the other, at the appropriate levels (threshold potencies) and in the appropriate order, they reinforce each other, enhance each other’s action so that the total, final effect is way bigger than the simple mathematical addition. Compare that with politics: one man, one vote, what will one vote more or less do? But when most of the voters chose a certain party, life in that country will never be the same. Excellent! But to achieve that, you need each and every single vote synchronised to act in unison.


Depth of action.
How deep can the F series go? Can it really eradicate old emotional roots? Can it take care of very serious physical problems, those we call “one sided diseases”, the problems that have become independent from the normal physiology and cannot be dealt with any more?
Let’s first revisit a case described in the first paper.
V.R. comes from a broken family, was molested, submitted to emotional blackmail, a forced marriage and more. I prescribed Natrum Muriaticum 5C to 89C: at 5C, there was a reappearance of old memories; at 13C, the urge to cry, old memories but a feeling of healing; at 21C, the reappearance of a very old backache; then a sort of regression therapy started: at 34C went back to teenager’s emotions and memories; at 55C back to 10 -13 years old; at 89C back to 2 – 8 years old; all this with “hurt and soul soreness” (her words) but a sense of “purging the emotions”; her actual memory has now increased, her body feels lighter and she has been able to loose weight. Isn’t that the Law of Hering in all its splendour? I then lost track of her until around May 2009, when she sent me, through another patient, this message: “I have been perfectly well since finishing the powders and did not need any more treatment. I received the ability to deal fully with my past and not let it influence my life any more. Thank you for your help”. Some time later she accompanied another patient and popped in to say hello: she was a transformed woman, slim, slender and beautiful, irradiating confidence; in fact, I did not recognise her at all, she had to tell me who she was.
I described the case of G.M.F previously (fibromyalgia, depression, extremely fast amelioration in 3 weeks and only the first 3 doses of Carcinosin 8C, 13C, and 21C); not only did the remedy work extremely fast on the physical aspect, but only halfway down the series, many emotional issues were resolved: rape, a smothering, overbearing, guilt producing mother, unresolved issues with the father.
A recurrent feature in some cases was the phenomenon of tapering of the effects of the doses, as I already discussed. When this happened, it has almost invariably signified that the remedy was good and correct but not completely curative and that another, deeper, prescription will be needed to anchor the cure. This is very important as it allows predicting the need for another remedy and gives the knowledge, to the practitioner and to the patient, that we are still in a “work in process” state, a dynamic evolution that should not be stopped lest everything recurs.

J.S. is another good illustration: 74 years old male coming with the diagnosis of myeloproliferative disease (but not leukaemia), with anaemia, weight loss, multiple food allergies and some OCD behaviours. After receiving all the blood tests at a later date, the final diagnosis was even more complicated, a mix of haemolytic anaemia, megaloblastic anaemia and myelodysplastic anaemia. WHY? It did not make any sense! A repeated detailed history revealed that the patient was abundantly in contact with lead during a motor car apprenticeship and while working for years with molten plastics, where lead was used too. Lead is a known myelotoxic and many of his symptoms repertorised Plumbum Metallicum, so he was given an F series 5C to 89C.
He came back 3 months later to give me an update: his haemoglobin has moved up from 96g/L to 98g/L to 101g/L; he can now eat fruit and other foods he was “allergic” to, his weight is increasing, has an enormous appetite, no weakness except a bit in the calves, the OCD is a lot better; some very old moles on the abdomen are disappearing; his symptoms are variable and changing but he insists he never has a bad day any more, only that some days are very good, some are less good but none is bad. And amazingly, this is only after the first 3 doses of Plumbum (5C, 8C and 13C). I regret we did not perform a hair mineral analysis, it would have been interesting.

Another remarkable fact that emerged is the ability of the so-called low potencies, 3C, 5C, to stir the patients so deeply, including mental and emotional symptoms and signs as well as very serious physical pathologies. We have always been taught in theory that low potencies are more physical and superficial and high potencies more M/E and deeper acting.
Yet the French homeopaths, using potencies from 3C to 30C have described similar situations, including psychiatric cures with 30C only.
This brings me back again to the notion of “threshold potencies”.
Analysing my cases, it appeared that:
- any potency within the F series can act at any level, be it physical, mental, emotional or spiritual
- there is no way to foresee which potency will have which action
- some potencies in some patients seem to have no activity whatsoever
- some patients will steadily improve while the potencies increase
- other patients will experience haphazardous jumps in better health

This puzzled me for a long time until I started comparing the patient’s clinical situation to a radio, as written before. Starting on one side, you move the dial towards the other side; in doing that, you go through all the stations that are broadcasting at that time, if they have something to broadcast, without missing any single one. The F potencies can be compared to the big, nationwide stations; they are unavoidable although they might be silent at times; you make your way from one station to the next one, each one giving you the right direction and the right boost towards the next one, which you cannot reach easily without going through the previous one; hence the nickname “threshold”: each potency/station is the opening, the gate to a series of symptoms and signs/programmes and music.
In between those major stations, you have the local radios, the radio amateurs, the radio pirates; all of them together, including the white noise between the stations and the silent stations are a typical representation of the patient’s clinical situation. By moving in an orderly manner from one to the other, the correct remedy who has now a single, unique “variable potency” can take care of all the problems. The “vibrational” or “energetic” status of any physical, mental or emotional problem can be located at any level in that variable potency, low or high. Please read again F.W’s email as a demonstration of the power of a 5C. When the “variable potency”, boosted in its trajectory in a regular manner by the different “threshold” potencies in the correct order, reaches that specific vibrational/energetic level, the problem is taken care of. In the next paragraph you will read the case of M.M.B, which will illustrate that notion again.
This explains:
- The success of the old school of low potencies using 3C, 5C, 7C, 9C, 12C, 15C, 18C, 24C and 30C; finally Hugues is vindicated and can make peace with Kent!
- The reason why some problems that should be covered by a high potency in theory do react only to a lower one, and reciprocally
- The findings of Parimal Banerji that some pathology will react to a specific potency but not to another one even though the remedy is perfectly indicated
- The speed and depth of results I have had with complicated cases, some of them presented in this paper

What about the very sensitive patients, the ones I previously recommended still using LM/Q potencies? I dared, as I described in the paragraph about aggravations. Using the LM/Q methodology of multiple dilution glasses, I managed to increase the speed of evolution while keeping the aggravations to a minimum.

Opening the case and removing obstacles.
Many cases in my practice are so complicated, of so long duration, having had so many different treatments that it becomes difficult to know how to start, how to approach the patient.
That is when the notions of “what has to be treated now”, “what is bothering the patient now” and “what does the patient want or need now” come in full force.
This relates to the often cited technique of “peeling the layers like an onion” (see the paragraph about “wrong remedies”): we deal with the actual situation, when that is cleared, we take care of the previous one that lead to this one, and we continue that way until we reach the core problem.
Even when the core problem is clear and known from the beginning, the proper treatment might not be working. A few patients came in after having been treated unsuccessfully by eminent homeopaths whom I know and trust fully. The roots of their problems were often emotional like abuse, rape, rejection or purely physical like the case of J.S presented earlier (myelodysplasia and Plumbum); the remedies were very clear and the prescriptions spot on, yet no results. The reasoning was that in order to survive and deal with those situations, many defences, behaviours and at times physical ailments had to be created; those layers prevented the remedy to reach the core issue or blocked its potential action. The indicated remedy “bounces back” upon layers, strata of other pathologies.
Most present in nicely arranged “onion peel” layers that can be eradicated one after the other.

The advantage I found in using an F series is that with the correct remedy for that layer of pathology, it is totally removed, completely baring the next layer and making the next prescription clear whereas with regular C potencies there are at times residual symptoms that can confuse the next step. And using LM/Q potencies to go through layers is too slow.

Some cases have their layers of pathology very intricated, with often one layer locking the others in place.
At times it is possible to remove the whole layer, even in its intricacies: all the symptoms then can change and the remedies we thought would be indicated are replaced by others.
At other times, the situation resembles more an archaeological dig: one piece is removed with one instrument/remedy, another part emerges, is removed with another instrument/remedy, then other parts and back to the first again, and so on in an almost unpredictable manner.
Another image might be more close to home: coloured play dough for children; it always end up with mixing all the different colours together in a beautiful sphere with intermingling lines and masses of different colours and consistencies. Fortunately we can buy new play dough.
Let’s illustrate with a few cases.
H.C had presenting symptoms of multiple allergies, respiratory, food allergies, ENT allergies and chronic fatigue syndrome. Emotional roots came up clearly: rigid upbringing, never allowed to be sick, but lived until recently with the delusion she had a happy family and childhood, and many other emotional and physical symptoms. She was first seen in May 2003. The first three remedies were Staphysagria, Ignatia and Natrum Muriaticum with good partial results, more details came up in her history. Then Carcinosin, Nux Vomica, repeat Carcinosin, Lac Humanum, Hura Braziliensis, Aconite, Aurum Muriaticum, Palladium, Lac Maternum, Nux Vomica again, Staphysagria again, Natrum Muriaticum again, Golden Topaz, Carcinosin again, Sepia, Pulsatilla, Medorrhinum, Sepia again then Sulphuric Acid that brought back the final core issue. All those remedies were taken either in C potency, liquid, or in LM/Q.
In March 2009, the final Ignatia 3C to 55C was prescribed and that ended the case (she needed some Ortho-Bionomy and an osteopathic adjustment too).
Of course the first reaction to such a description is “zigzagging”, “sloppy management”, “poor case taking”, etc,…Each remedy was, at the time of prescription, absolutely indicated (within my skills) and brought forward old, forgotten, inactive symptoms and signs while removing more recent ones. Almost each visit started with “I am a lot better, but…”. We travelled back in time, admittedly through the scenic road and not the freeway, until everything that had to be dealt with was dealt with. It is impossible to know with certainty, but I feel should I have known and used the F series 6 years ago, some phases would have been very much shortened and the whole case would have been solved a lot faster.

M.M.B is another patient with an intricated situation, physical, emotional and spiritual. A very interesting feature is that she remembers 13 past lives, 13 reincarnations. And common features are present in almost all of them: persecution, cruelty, torture, violent death by decapitation, fire or mauled by animals. In her present incarnation, the persecution is active again albeit through more “civilised” channels, but with the same emotional content; she has not been tortured or killed (yet) but her physical complaints are remarkably similar to what would be expected if you’d survive the sword, the fire, the tiger, etc,…
Whether reincarnation, previous lives, metempsychosis is real or a figment of one’s imagination is not up for discussion; if it is part of the patient’s description of symptoms and signs it has to be taken into account.
After some mucking around, the remedy Carcinosin was chosen and had to be taken up to 233C until its indication vanished (temporarily?). While going through that series, an accidental discovery was made: some annoying symptoms were temporarily but consistently ameliorated by a piece of chocolate or some chocolate cake.
Reading the materia medica of Chocolate showed it covered lots of aspects of her case, so this was to be the next remedy, 3C to 233C. In the midst of that series, a dental fistula appeared, annoying little symptom, purely local. Calcarea Sulphurica should cover that and as we were playing with F series we decided she would take it 5C to 34C while interrupting the Chocolate for a few days. Lo and behold, the fistula got better but so did other symptoms too, deep ones. We decided to continue the series up to 233C and the removal of deep physical and emotional problems is continuing. Interestingly, the amelioration from the Chocolate seems to be still there, waiting for the series to continue, which points towards the fact it is a/the/one good Simillimum. The choice of the high end point of 233C is explained by the enormous timeframe that has to be covered.
This is an example of a remedy exposing another layer, through which yet another one appears.

Zigzag treatments, layers, partial treatments, intercurrent remedies, now there is a logical explanation about what all this is exactly and how to use the situation to the patient’s advantage: intrication and Fibonacci series.

Constitutional treatments.
When a remedy is deemed to be the Simillimum and at the same time is the patient’s so-called constitutional remedy, then not only is the cure of the actual problem achieved but the state of health should become optimal.
Using the F series for constitutional treatment only seemed at first to be overkill; after all, 150 years of doing exactly that with 1, 2, or 3 single potencies cannot be wrong.
So, nosy as I am and unable to resist a challenge, I decided to try a few “constitutional” prescriptions and as the Law of Occurrences prescribes, a few patients came in, otherwise healthy but wanting to be at their best, with some specifically wanting their “constitution to be taken care of”.
Remedies were given up to 89C and, not unexpectedly, not much change happened, with the positive spin towards the patient, being able to tell them “see how healthy you are!”
I then decided to put my money where my mouth is and to take my own constitutional remedy: you will be able to read the transcript of this journey in the chapter: “Silica: a personal encounter with the Fibonacci series” in the book(let) that will condense and summarize both papers.
In a nutshell: over the years, I repeatedly took Silica many times, in all potencies from 6C to 50M (and have eaten my share of sand as a child) with almost no effect whatsoever. With the F series, going up to 89C, I did experience physical changes (no, my hair did not grow back, darn!), relief of chronic pain, extraordinary dreams, a quietening of mood as if I was in permanent meditative state, unbelievable. I have then added 144C and 233C for the sake of experimentation.
The bottom line is that despite having the proper constitutional remedy and despite the multiple and different potencies, nothing but the F series has been able to give me the “clean slate” state I am in now. Maybe I should rename the F series “the Mr. Clean of Homeopathy”.

Administration of the remedies.
Over the last year I continued experimenting with different methods of taking the remedies. I use single dose powders so that my patients have only a limited supply of remedies, but using regular globules would be exactly the same.
1. Dry dose: according to Organon 4 and still used successfully by many practitioners; take the dose, wait until no more change, no more evolution, then go to the next potency; or if there is no change whatsoever, wait 24-48 hours and go to the next potency. It is simple, clear, no fuss and it works.
2. Semi-dry, wet dose: what I called Organon 4 and a half: the powder is dissolved in a teaspoon of water; it is basically a dry dose but in more volume, pre-moisturised instead of waiting for the saliva to do it, reaching more of the mucosa, having a better absorption and a better effect, a stronger transmission of information using the vector of acupuncture meridians (see my other paper “Transmission of energetic information” for detailed explanations). The main advantage of this method is that it involves the patient into preparing his medicine, it is active participation, not passively swallowing what was ordered.
3. Liquid dose: Organon 5 and 6; the powder is dissolved in a glass of water (~ 250 mls) and either a drop, a teaspoon or a sip are taken; when the effect stabilises or starts fading away, repeat after stirring until there is no more reaction; then move to the next potency, same way. Sensitive patients use multiple dilution glasses and work their way backwards, the same technique as used with the LM/Q potencies.
4. Dry and liquid: my colleague Meridy Brown has used a combination technique of 1 dry dose (1 globule or ½ of the powder) followed by teaspoons from a glass with 1 globule or the second half of the powder dissolved in it. Her comments are that the dry dose creates a clearer and faster awareness, an immediate reaction that then needs to be fine-tuned and completed by small increments until the whole effect of that potency level is achieved. I have only done that so far with 3 patients and, at the time of writing, have not yet received any feedback, so I cannot compare and comment. A case can be made that it might speed up the evolution at each level of potency. I see this method as useful in very complicated cases of long duration with long and intense pathological past, where so much has to be mopped away that insisting at each stage of potency is indicated; where in “usual” patients, the return to normal will take care of the residual small problems, in those intricated cases some external help to finish the cleaning is warranted. Experimentation and time will tell.

This fits very well with the orthodox concept of giving one dose and waiting. It also fit with Hahnemann’s admonition of never repeating a dose in exactly the same potency. We need to see what the remedy has done, let that dose exert its full action (although the action is immediate, what we see is the effect caused by it on the physiology, and that is what we do not want to interfere with) and only then either repeat the dose or move to the next potency. If there is no activity whatsoever, repetition or moving earlier and faster is then justified.
I have already described that some potencies, some levels of vibration, will not resonate with anything active in the patient, so there is no need to stay there: you do not spend too much time listening to white noise or a silent radio station, do you? And if it is the wrong remedy, the faster we know it, the better.
A regular schedule of dosage is warranted for some patients who need precision in their lives, for some who will not be able to perceive transformations, be it subtle or not and for some who are impaired to such an extent that the practitioner has to take control. Those are rare situations and often the amelioration created by the first doses brings back awareness, flexibility and suppleness, allowing an intelligent progression of the prescription. I have given examples and written more in detail about this in the paragraph “Timing of the remedies”. I need to repeat and heavily insist upon the absolutely essential role of having a good system of follow-up during the course of the treatment, a lot more than with C or LM/Q potencies. Changes can occur at any time, in an unpredictable manner and can be deep, with quite heavy physical or emotional reactions. The patient needs to know the practitioner is a phone call or an email away. Reassurance and explanation of what is happening is often the only needed action; some Bach Flowers or other Flower Essences can be very helpful. In the last 2 years, I only sent one patient (P.S) to the emergency room for chest pains after a remedy, everything was normal and as described in the paragraph “Aggravations” eventually a logical explanation was found. But the last thing we need is patients panicking or being forcefully medicated for an acute panic attack when a phone call and a few drops of Rescue Remedy can take care of the whole situation.

What started as an attempt to simplify the choice of potency has evolved into a revision of concepts of homeopathy.
There is an eternal constant: the remedy must be correct.
So must the approach be: what to treat in the first place; how to be flexible enough to interrupt the treatment, chose another one, then resume the previous one; how to be aware of the unpredictability of the therapeutic evolution; how to accept that the best remedy might not be indicated yet and chose the one(s) that will lead to it; how to be open to the fact that the same remedy might have to be used many times at different phases and times of the treatment; and how not to be obsessed by a timeline, especially in very intricated cases.

I have learned that that every F potency is a very special one, a threshold potency, a most active potency, and that in their proper order their ability to cure becomes optimal.

I have learned that in fact there are no different potencies, that each remedy has only one single variable potency, similar to the spectrum of the electromagnetic waves. In physics, you measure X Rays, ultrasounds, colour, radio waves, gamma rays differently depending on the instrument you use; none of them stops existing when you switch the instrument off, or as the Taoist koan asks: if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is present, does it still make a sound? In real medicine, the patient’s history, symptoms, signs and complaints are localised “nodes” in time and space, covered by a specific potency of a specific remedy. Different remedies might be indicated at different times and in different places; the patient tells us what the remedy is, the potency is unpredictable (so far); moreover, the strength of one symptom can easily overshadow other symptoms belonging to the same remedy but influenced by different potencies. Once the strongest symptom has been dealt with, the other symptoms might appear and send the practitioner on a wild goose chase for another remedy when the only thing needed is another potency of the same remedy. Going through all possible potencies in an orderly fashion makes the treatment whole, complete and permanent.

I have learned that this method works well, works fast, works deep and with the correct remedies, is curative.

I have learned that antidoting a remedy is not possible; it is an intellectual concept but not a reality. When a treatment has worked well, but everything recurs after a coffee, an essential oil or an antibiotic, that treatment was not correct, the pathology was not cured but only silenced (the dreaded suppression of orthodoxy); the treatment has to be revisited with a clear, open mind and corrected whatever pain this can inflict to our ego.

I have learned that many cases are intricated, have Gordian knots that can be untied.

I have learned that with some (no, with a lot of) pigheadedness and obstination, total cure is possible. I have relearned and reaffirmed one of my mottos: never give up!

How does the Fibonacci system fit within the paradigm of the so-called “Classical”, “Hahnemaniann” or “Orthodox” homeopathy?
- single remedy: yes, of course, one remedy at a time, the appropriate one
- single dose: the 4th Organon practitioners, adepts of the “one dose and wait” method, can easily practice this way; the 5th Organon practitioners, adepts of the liquid dose with repetitions can easily practice this way; the 6th Organon practitioners, although the F series is not an LM/Q potency, can still practice the multiple dilutions glasses, variable amounts, variable potentisations between repetition methodology
- never repeat the same potency twice: clearly, it fits

And for those who will assimilate the concept that each remedy has only one single, wide, variable potency, then of course there is always only one single dose, although divided in fractions that are needed to achieve the full potential of the single full dose.

His whole life, Hahnemann was dissatisfied with posology. He started with what was available, the crude doses, experimented a lot (see the paper by Jan Klussendorf, Hahnemann’s Pre Organon Views in Homeopathic Links, Summer 2009, Vol 22:112-116), settled for a time with dry centesimals, shifted to liquid centesimals, then created the LM/Q potencies. And then still used all of the above at some times, according to those who read his Paris casebooks. Even though Hahnemann wrote that the LM/Q potencies were the most perfect ones, he was obviously not totally convinced as he still used C potencies; and I have no reason to doubt David Little and others who have read and translated the Paris casebooks. The Fibonacci Series is nothing else but a continuation of Hahnemann’s research for the perfect method of administration; it only needs a little bit more experimenting for its details.

The F series encompasses all those systems, apparently integrating them: it makes sense; it is a natural series, not an artificial, mathematical construction.
With very few exceptions, for the last 9 months (at the time of writing), I have used the F series exclusively, although not in acute cases where I need to use what I have at hand, my stockpile of C potencies.

I also need to repeat that the F series allows for the use of hand made potencies, so that we know exactly what we give. Korsakovian potencies, continuous flow and other methods create dynamised remedies, no doubt about it; but as I demonstrated in the first paper, we really do not know which potency they are in reality.
We could use the X/D potencies in an F series, no doubt about it, we could also use the CK but only if the Korsakov method was used from the very first potency.

We have now almost 110 remedies (and growing) that have been prepared in the F series, at the cost of a few tennis elbows. Any remedy, any substance can be made in an F series.

This has also opened the door to other questions that were hinted at in the previous paper: how many succussions should be used? Should there be a different number of succussions for different remedies? Why? How do we find out? More research to be done and it has already started…..

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
New Plymouth
New Zealand
July 2009.

Sunday, November 2, 2008

A teenager's view of vaccinations

My son Jonathan, 19 years old, surprised me by giving me this text. He is into computers, has no link or interest whatsoever to any type of medicine, except that he and his sister have to listen to my continuous rantings (poor kids....).

Now here is an original explanation of the harm done by vaccination; it will appeal to younger people, teens, who are bored to death by pontifying old farts like me.
Jonathan has given permission to copy, diffuse, publish his text by whatever means available, as long as proper credit is given. So feel free to forward anywhere and everywhere.....

Vaccination – an Analogy

Vaccinations are effective at creating mutants. No, that doesn’t mean that your children, or children’s children (if you were so lucky), will be born with three eyes or the ability to spit flames out of their ears. Let’s face it; if that were the case more people would be doing it. Here’s a stab at an analogy that might be clearer than the paragraphs of genetic jargon that most don’t bother trying to understand.
Imagine your body is a little fort set on a grassy plain, fairly stable and feeling as secure as it is possible to be. Sure you have all the little subsections of it with their own little jobs, but concentrate on the relevance of your many little soldiers (purely in the metaphorical vein, not those other “little soldiers”) as they constantly patrol about your fort. No real problem arise since your troops get the attention they need and replaced as the need arises, a somewhat grave assumption/generalization really, but just pretend. Suddenly, one day a band of merry barbarians ransack another fort nearby (or so you’ve heard from your friendly high-ranking forts). That battle was messy, with the civilians shaken and many soldiers lying splattered or little more than mush spread along the grassy knolls, but the barbarians were driven off, or even wiped out. It sounds quite terrible but for the purpose of this example this is natural; a brief cleaning job and a little while to recover, more than likely calling in some outside support to rebuild, and the only remnants of the fight would have been a tactic developed for future reference. Completely normal, it happens all the time, sometimes the troops are the only ones to even realize anything is going on.
But you’re not like those other forts that let their soldiers get splattered everywhere, maybe you don’t entirely trust these outside reinforcements that are offered as an easy, if daily part of routine. So you look around and find out that the larger, high-up forts are offering this way that assures that after a little pinch you’ll never have to worry about having to put your little soldiers in jeopardy. Oh, it seems too good to be, but you trust these big people to take care of you. They’ve taken good care of you so far, haven’t they? They set up your transports efficiently, paved secure trading routes and made sure you had a comfortable existence, right? Oh, I’m sure they’re getting on that soon then. Regardless you trust they have whatever you need since they’re on top, even though you didn’t vote for them to begin with, and so get set to have this miracle reinforcement.
Soon after you receive a small box at your doorstep with no instructions, but your troops know what to do. You have a handful of those fearsome barbarians, or at least you assume they once were, tied to polls desperately trying to reach at their dulled swords while their nasty upbringing is the only thing still keeping them up. The rest of the afternoon is a lovely time bashing at the gimped barbarians with flails while others examine the technology of their not-at-all-useful weaponry. This was a productive day; surely you’ve raised morale, prepared yourself for the enemy’s offensive capabilities and even found the best places to aim at. Immediately you begin fortifying your walls; no more of this wood stuff, brick and mortar that no pike could penetrate. Why, you’re impervious! Those barbarians take one look at the thick, tall walls that are your defences and turn away to look for someone else to annoy, but alas, everyone else in range of their mules has already done the same as yourself. Surely they are now a dying kind, and you did your part to survive.
A month later the barbarians return to your doorstep in the hundreds, toting full plate armour, catapults, trebuchets and other siege engines. You weren’t expecting that, I’m sure, but the barbarians learned from their neighbour’s mistakes and came prepared. How did they do it? Well, they’re not as stupid as one would make them out to be. They waited, they grew in strength and number after some reports from what survived in past attacks that were successful. But you were never attacked before! Right? How could they know your defences when you’ve never actually met (that you know of)? Oh wait, you got that little crate some time ago, which thousands of others received as well, exact copies in fact, and these new and improved super barbarians don’t need to know what you can do since you prepared the exact same way as everyone else. Now the higher-ups ask you to get this other little parcel that will hold off an invasion, and you trust them because you didn’t have much trouble after the first time.
So what about these people who went crazy and refused the package of gimped barbarians, and took these reinforcements on a regular basis that you shunned due to mistrust? Their forces are large and resources vast with stores of equipment and provisions for battle. They prepared for everything, even if their defences don’t seem to be substantial to you. Their forces can continue to fight longer before dwindling, though that is of little concern as they increase their reinforcements daily. They can deal with the average troupe of barbarians as if it was hardly a nuisance, and they can even stave off the oddities that you helped create. There are more of them, significantly, and they operate much faster with their surroundings, heavy plate and siege weapons be damned.
What relevance does this have to anything at all? If you have to ask, then you’ve missed the point entirely. Go to your mailbox; you probably have a package waiting.

Jonathan Rozencwajg.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

A new methodology for the use of C potencies.

Here is the abstract of an (long) article about a different, new approach to the use of low and medium C potencies, prepared exactly according to the rules created by Hahnemann, that allow to reach extremely high potencies equivalents.

You can find the full text, pictures and graphs either on www.hpathy.com or on www.lulu.com where there is a free PDF download (type my name in the search box). The original title is "Removing the guesswork from potency selection".

I'd appreciate comments and questions and if you use the system, your experience with it would be very welcome so that I could include it in next year's update.

Removing the guesswork from potency selection.

A new methodology for the use of C potencies based on a mathematical Law of Nature.

Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD.

Copyright Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
Permission is given to copy this text and diffuse it for educational and practical purposes provided it is done so in its integrity and proper acknowledgment is given to the author. This text is to be given, offered but not resold.

Removing the guesswork from potency selection.
A new methodology for the use of C potencies based on a mathematical Law of Nature.

Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD.

Finding the right remedy is one thing, the most important one. Then comes the question of which potency, in which system (C, X, LM/Q) to select the potencies and how to find the proper ones.
Articles, books, treaties have been written on the single, frustrating, issue of which potency to use and when to use it. In a recent book “What about the potency?” the author has interviewed many masters of homeopathy about their ways of using potencies; no consensus emerged, everyone had another very successful but different system and was committed to it.
David Little teaches to evaluate the sensitivity of the patient on a scale of 1 to 1000 and “prescribe accordingly”; more precise than what others suggest but still very subjective as it is based on a “guesstimate” by the practitioner and is then very much a function of the practitioner’s own health and state of mind.
Kent’s Harmonics of 6C – 30C – 200C – 1M – 10M is widely used and based on his and his follower’s experience, but what is its logic, except for habit and availability?
The French series of 3C – 5C – 7C – 9C – 12C – 15C – 18C – 24C – 30C has been useful to generations of patients and has proved its usefulness, but again, what is its logic?
LM/Q potencies are purely linear, and remove a lot of trials and errors by starting at the lowest and climbing the potencies one after the other; even if you jump a potency, the progression is still linear, but straight lines are rare if at all present in Nature and this is often a protracted slow process, which is perfect when this is what is needed.
I present a new approach to the use of C potencies that is based on a mathematical concept found everywhere in Nature; this removes completely the guesswork and has proved so far to be easy to use, deep acting, fast acting, but needing an intense collaboration between the patient and the practitioner (although this could only be the method’s teething problems). Moreover, it has the added advantage of using low and medium hand-made potencies, avoiding another piece of guesswork: what is it we really give above 30/200C?

Monday, August 4, 2008

Organotherapy, Drainage and Detoxification.

Well I finally made it and published my book about Organotherapy, Drainage and Detoxification.
Like "Dynamic Gemmotherapy" it is available at www.lulu.com printed on demand so a lot more ecological.
Here are a few (no, actually quite a lot)pages....

Organotherapy, Drainage and Detoxification.

A starting point to safe practice for Homeopaths, Herbalists, Naturopaths, Traditional Healers and enlightened Medical Doctors.

Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.

The Art of Medicine consists in amusing the patient while Nature cures the disease.......Voltaire.

The Art of Homeopathy consists in curing the patient so that no disease ever recurs....... Dr. Joe.

Copyright Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD and Natura Medica Ltd.

All rights reserved. Any form of copy by mechanical, electronic or other means strictly forbidden without previous authorisation. Breach of copyright will be prosecuted by all means available, everywhere, always.


First introduction 1
Second introduction 5
Prelude 7
Background and Theory 13
Organotherapy 17
From Cannibalism to Remedies 18
Herbal Organotherapy 23
Kidneys 23
Liver 24
Heart 26
Endocrine glands 27
Thyroid 27
Adrenals 28
Brain 29
Skin 31
Immune system 31
Gemmotherapy in Organotherapy 33
Nutritional Organotherapy 35
Brain 36
Immune system 37
Heart 38
Lungs 40
Liver and Gallbladder 40
Kidneys 41
Stomach and Intestines 42
Colon and Bowel Flora 43
Thyroid 44
Adrenals 44
Diabetes 45
Oligotherapy 46
Organopathy 48
Drainage 53
Nutritional drainage 53
Kidneys and Urinary tract 56
Liver 65
Pancreas 71
Blood 74
Lymphatic system 75
Veins 77
Arteries 78
Heart 81
Lungs 82
Colon 84
Endocrine in general 88
Thyroid 89
Adrenals 90
Male 91
Female 92
Skin 93
Brain and Nerves 94
Drugs 97
Joints 98
Phytotherapic (Herbal) drainage 105
Alteratives 106
Kidneys and Urinary tract 109
Liver 114
Pancreas 118
Blood 118
Lymphatic system 119
Venous system 121
Arteries 124
Heart 126
Lungs 127
Colon 128
Endocrine in general 129
Thyroid 129
Adrenals 131
Skin 133
Brain and nerves 135
Joints 136
Gemmotherapic drainage 138
Homeobotanical drainage 141
Homeopathic drainage 145
Channelling remedies 150
Remedy relationships 153
The Kollistch list 154
Drainage remedies 158
Kidneys and Urinary tract 160
Liver 175
Pancreas 181
Spleen 182
Blood 183
Lymphatic system 186
Veins 189
Arteries 191
Heart 195
Lungs 201
EENT 207
Digestive system 210
Stomach 211
Pylorus 213
Intestine and Colon 214
Rectum and Haemorrhoids 220
Endocrine in general 223
Carbohydrate metabolism 223
Thyroid 223
Adrenals 225
Male 227
Female 228
Breast 229
Skin and mucosa 232
Brain and Nervous system 237
Bones and Joints 241
Serosa 245
Specifics 245
Osteopathic drainage 249
Transmission of energetic information
in the body 253
Detoxification 260
Sweat it out! Far Infra Red sauna 262
Enemas and colonics 265
Nutritional detoxification 267
Cilantro and Chlorella 268
Specific detoxifiers 271
Nutritionals 271
Minerals 273
Phytotherapic (Herbal) detoxification 275
Chelation 276
Lithotherapy 277
Isopathy aka Isotherapy 278
Lesser known techniques 282
Gemmotherapy 282
Lithotherapy 316
Oligotherapy 321
Summary 329
Conclusion 331
The Author 332
References and Bibliography 333


This book started as a compilation of my own practice. As far as I can remember, I always used some form of preparation for the in-depth treatment after a few patients suffered aggravations from the right remedy. Then I started being asked about this or that form of drainage, how to detoxify and was it a real thing or just a New Age fad. Eventually I thought it would make sense, and life easier, to put some order in what I was doing. While doing that I realised that over the years I had indeed accumulated a lot of knowledge and techniques that needed some order and logic. At that time I wrote an essay for our local homeopathic journal, Homeopathy NewZ, which you will find, however modified, as the first Introduction.
I also came to see that there were lots of correlations between different methods; that they were synergistic but that every type of practitioner, homeopath, herbalist, nutritionist, naturopath, was often doing his own little system without daring to investigate what others were using. What a waste! And moreover, many of those techniques were written, used and described in other languages.
Surprisingly, nobody ever bothered to translate any of them (except Dr. Maury) and to put them together so that they could be learned and used as an addition to one’s core practice.
So here it is. Without pretending to be complete or exhaustive, there is a lot of material, techniques and references.
Might I suggest you put aside any preconceptions and read it fully? Then try to use any technique you feel comfortable with or which is the closest to what you already know. After that, try some other ones. Your patients will be ever so thankful.
By the way, English is not my mother tongue, so, if you find grammatical errors or some style of writing that is not the Queen’s English, bear with me, please.


First introduction, mainly aimed at Homeopaths (but useful for everyone).

Homeopathy is the treatment of diseases by remedies chosen according to the Law of Similars.
All Homeopaths agree on that. Well….most of them.

But is that all?

How comes that sometimes a remedy, obviously well chosen, works poorly? And this even when the choice is checked by colleagues and teachers, and the same remedy is suggested?
How comes that a well-chosen remedy sometimes gives terrible aggravations? Wrong potency, wrong dose, are we told. However, is that really all?

Hahnemann, Kent and most of the contemporary Classical homeopaths advocate the use of a single remedy without any interference from any other form of treatment.
That is an ideal.
But is it always attainable? And is it always justified?

In today’s world, we are confronted not only with diseases, acute or chronic, but with a slow intoxication (intoxication is the introduction of external harmful compounds in the organism) and intoxination (intoxination is the flooding of the organism by internally produced harmful compounds, including bacterial toxins) of our organisms, a slow, subtle, insensible but all pervading and almost unavoidable poisoning: adulterated food, water polluted with the best of intentions (Cl, Fluor), polluted air, EMF from computers, TV, phones, power lines, vaccines and medications, etc,…

Our “Lebenskraft” (I am using the German word Lebenskraft instead of Vital Force because there has been too many arguments about what Hahnemann really meant by this word, and so many different translations. I do not want to become entangled in useless semantic arguments), Life Energy, Ki, Prana, Ruach, whatever you want to call it, is busy fighting the poisons and the diseases with the help of most of our organs.
To treat with Homeopathy, we introduce an artificial disease that is supposed to displace the natural disease. But it does not do that on its own; the remedy needs the involvement of the Lebenskraft and the active participation of all our organs.

What if they are too busy just maintaining life? Wouldn’t that explain why a well chosen remedy does not work?

What if the supplementary imbalance from the remedy just pushes some organs into a totally chaotic answer instead of starting the repairs? Wouldn’t that explain many unexpected aggravations?

Wouldn’t it make sense to prepare the body to heal? Isn’t it logic to optimise the function of each and every organ before the “real” treatment starts?

That is the purpose of Drainage, Detoxification and Organotherapy. And it is nothing really new, it was well done and codified by the French School of Homeopathy with famous names like Fortier Bernoville, Duprat, Vannier, Conan Meriadec, Michaud, Allendy, Bastien, Barbier, Nebel, Rouy, Zissu and many others.

Many Classical Unicist Homeopaths claim that the Simillimum is its own draining remedy.
Yes. Maybe. Sometimes.
Undeniably, there are situations where the correct remedy restores the normal physiology and functions so that total health is restored, toxins, poisons, metals, xenobiotics are eliminated and everything is running smoothly forever after.
Are you willing to gamble on this affirmation?
I am not!
I see too often patients receiving the correct prescription without any reaction or at best a very weak one indicating that the remedy was indeed correct but also had its action inhibited.
If I can avoid aggravations, complications or lack of efficiency, if I can speed up the recovery of a patient, then I will use whatever is needed.
There is no contradiction between Drainage and Hahnemanian Homeopathy.
One prepares the way for the other.
It is true that sometimes, by unblocking the function of the organism, the Lebenskraft is freed to perform its original task and produces a cure, or at least a sensible amelioration without the prescription of a Simillimum.
So what?
Isn’t that in absolute agreement with Paragraph 1 of the Organon? “The physician’s highest and only calling is to make the sick healthy, to cure, as it is called”.
And indeed detoxification is nothing else but the removal of obstacles to cure.

When you plan a long trip in your car, don’t you check and repair it beforehand to ensure a safe trip? Why would you do that for your car and not for your body?

Second introduction, aimed at other Natural Medicine practitioners (but Homeopaths could learn something from it).

Detoxify! Purify your body! Clean your organs!
Our patients are swarmed by advertisements and articles trying to sell them products with health benefits centred on the concept of being full of harmful substances that need to be removed.
And many are trying, eventually arriving at the clinic with bags full of empty boxes and no results whatsoever.
We know there is truth in the “cleansing mantra”, but we also know we need to give a precise treatment, individualized to the need of each and every patient according to his history, his clinical condition, his pathology and his desire to explore one way rather than another.
Yet most of the prescriptions I see are trademark products, the latest combination or the latest special juice from an exotic place, or whatever else. They might work but there is rarely any logic in the matching of the patient with the product, except maybe the financial logic.
As health practitioners, as professionals, we are bound to understand not only the patients’ problem but how our remedies, drugs, medications, techniques, whatever we use, work, what they do exactly, when to use them and when not, why use them and why not.
That is the aim of this book.
Not to teach a technique. But to explain how to use what you already know in a proper way to achieve a proper, effective and safe detoxification; and maybe also to show how others do it and encourage you to explore more in depth different avenues that can complement what you already do. You would not be reading this if you did not want to enhance your knowledge.
Homeopaths will find dynamized remedies, Herbalists will find phytotherapic and gemmotherapic remedies, Osteopaths will find some organ adjustments, Naturopaths will find Nutrition and all of the above and everybody could learn about little known but very useful techniques like Lithotherapy, Oligotherapy, Gemmotherapy, Homeobotanical Medicine and others.
You will also see the links between those different approaches and how they can blend with each other without loosing their individuality; and you will be able to offer different possibilities and alternatives to patients who might be scared to try some of them for whatever reason.
No book can claim to be complete and exhaustive; this one is not different. You might have a very successful way to detoxify that is not listed here. Fantastic! How about publishing it? You might know of yet another herb that could help; let me know.
This work is based mainly on my personal experience backed by the vast amount of knowledge and clinical experience of Masters of the Art of Healing. It still is and will continually be a work in progress.


How did we get there anyway? How comes that earlier practitioners were able to treat many diseases with just a few remedies, and we, with all the accumulated knowledge of centuries of practice and with all the progress in knowledge, cannot match their feats?
As I wrote in the introduction, it is exogenous toxicity. Let me be rude, crass and vulgar for a moment: we are completely screwed, we are in deep shit and we have nobody else to blame but ourselves!
That does not mean that ONLY exogenous toxins, metals, poisons and xenobiotics are the culprits in the world’s state of health and that all the natural techniques we use are worthless UNLESS we remove them; daily practice shows that this is far from the truth. Nevertheless, many cures could be accelerated or completed with a good cleansing……
Genetics, constitution, diathesis, miasm, terrain, whatever you call it, is modified by exogenous toxins:
- no matter how strong our genetic background, our constitution is, a poison remains a poison and will act as a poison, all the time, every time
- it is the interaction of the poison with the terrain/constitution/genetic that will create either a specific disease or a specific weakness that in turn will allow a disease to emerge
- removing the toxins, or at least lowering their level and influence, allows the body to go back towards a more “virginal” terrain that can then be treated more easily with natural (meaning reinforcing the normal, healthy physiological activity) medicine
- not doing that explains partial results and failures in the hands of the best practitioners

Let me give a few examples of what modern day living and technology is introducing in our bodies and the result thereof, without writing a textbook of toxicology. When looked for, all those substances are found in our bodies.
Dioxin: cancers, brain damage, endometriosis
PCB: leukaemia and other cancers, heart problems

Pesticides and Insecticides: CFS, Parkinson, bladder and colon cancer,
other cancers, heart pathology
Phtalates (leaching form plastics): hormonal modifications
Styrene and Benzene: hepatitis, leukaemia, encephalopathy, paralysis, convulsions, arrhythmias, cancers, CFS
Toluene: nail deformity, menstrual disturbances, liver destruction, haematological problems, MI, depression, paraesthesia, neuropathies, CFS
Vinyl: cancer, birth defect, genetic damage, auto-immune diseases
Xenoestrogens (mainly phtalates): mimics estrogens and cause early puberty, endometriosis, and gynaecological cancers
Fluoride: behavioural changes, arthritis, bone cancers (osteosarcoma), heart, brain, kidney injuries and hormonal changes, thyroid dysfunction
Chlorine: increases cholesterol level because of direct damage to vascular endothelium (cholesterol is used to patch the damaged wall); transformed into chloramines and chloroform when comes in contact with proteins, becoming a carcinogen; thyroid dysfunction
All the heavy metals: aluminium, arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and many others are often the “undetected and not thought about” cause of multiple diseases in each and every organ and function of the body; just look up the table of contents of an Internal Medicine textbook, many if not most of the diseases listed there can be mimicked or caused by heavy metals.
I should also write about GME, radioactive pollution, EMF pollution (e-fog), etc,…..That would be too much for this book but the association of heavy metals and EMFs brings us to a very interesting phenomenon called “The Antenna Effect”.
It appears that people who have heavy metals stored in their bodies have them act as “antennas” and attract, focus, electromagnetic fields around them, causing weird symptoms that cannot be explained otherwise through physiology or physiopathology. The more metals are present, the strongest the antenna effect, the worst the symptoms; no wonder that in time, cellular changes happen and cancers are created; this could very well explain the discrepancies between many studies relating the use of cell phones and the occurrence of brain tumours: should the load in heavy metals in the brain be known, we might well find out that the more metals are present, the earlier and the more aggressive (?) a tumour will be. I would be delusional to believe we can stop the use of cellphones, laptops, computers, wi-fi and other components of electro-smog; at least, through proper detoxification, we can minimise if not completely remove that antenna effect. I refer you to Dr. Yoshiaki Omura’s research for more details.
Dr. Robert Becker, in his book “Cross Currents” describes that bacterias in culture exposed to EMFs are “fooled” into sensing this as an immune attack and in reaction secrete much more powerful toxins; through the antenna effect, germs that would otherwise not bother us might become more virulent, especially in patients loaded with heavy metals, compounding the effects of those metals with chronic, virulent infections. More reasons to get rid of the toxic metal burden.

The xenobiotics were unknown not so long ago and our bodies are not engineered to deal with them; heavy metal pollution was not as intense as it has been for the last century, even though they were creating havoc for a long time: for example, it is said that the lead pipes bringing water to the Roman households were responsible for the chronic occurrence of brain damage in the Roman population and eventually responsible for the decline and demise of the Roman Empire.

All that comes on top of the usual and well-known causes of endogenous toxicity created by liver, kidneys, adrenal, endocrine and other insufficiencies whose origins are found in infections, trauma, malnutrition or dysnutrition and even emotional events. Diabetes, kidney failure, liver failure, hypothyroidism, Addison’s disease are found everywhere in the medical literature dating back to Ayurvedic medicine, Chinese medicine, Greek and Roman medicine up until now. Those insufficiencies start at an energetical level where all conventional tests are normal, but can be diagnosed for example through TCM diagnosis, then follow with functional problems where the clinical picture is clearer but still the usual tests are normal or borderline but “still in the acceptable range”, to end with full blown failure when finally the patient stops being considered as suffering from depression or being a malingerer……..organotherapy and drainage at the earliest stage possible will be a lot simpler and save a lot of suffering…and money.

Hahnemann clearly states in the Organon that removing the cause of disease is paramount to the success of a treatment: remove from damp living quarters, remove from areas of malaria are examples found in his writings. The same applies today with chronic poisoning of our bodies. All those xenobiotics, chemicals and heavy metals can mimic or cause ANY labelled disease in any body system. How would you expect to cure any of them while their triggers are still present and active?

Is there any use to test which exogenous toxins are present (the endogenous almost always appearing in the usual conventional lab work)? As a scientist, I definitely would love to know what I am dealing with; as a homeopath using Isotherapy, it would be useful in order to prescribe a precise isotherapic remedy; as a herbalist and nutritionist it would also be useful in order to fine tune the prescription of herbs and foods or supplements known to selectively remove said toxins. Yet there are some drawbacks:
- you would need to test for every known metal and xenobiotic unless there is a clearly documented contamination, in which case no test is needed except in order to know the level of contamination; even if it was possible, the costs would be prohibitive
- some useful tests are difficult to perform and very costly, needing specialised laboratories, dioxin for example; very few practitioners would have access to those labs and even fewer patients would be able to cover the costs, as public health generally does not get involved
- there are many controversies in the ways of performing and interpreting the results of tests: for example, the ongoing discussion whether hair samples should be washed or not before testing; or what does a certain level of toxin in the hair really mean? The body managing to expel it through dead tissues? A continuing intoxication? Contamination? And the same goes for the absence of a toxin in the hair or in the urine after a provocation test: it does not mean the tissues and organs are not saturated with that toxin, it means only it is not present where you look for it
- and last but not least, the discrepancy between the acceptance of the results by practitioners of different specialities: forensic experts rely very much on the results of those tests, sometimes ending up in long jail terms or death penalties where it still exists, whereas many internal medicine specialists scoff at them .. go figure…

In any case, practically, I tend to use general detoxification procedures at all times and add to them specific therapies, like Isotherapy, if one of the toxins is known. In all my years of practice, I have used hair mineral analysis only twice, and it was not useful as I could not do the tests again after treatment to objectivate the clinical results, for financial reasons. So, here you go: it would be nice and useful, but it is not indispensable, in my opinion, of course.

Shall we proceed to learn how to remove them?

More????????? get the book......... :-)